On Saturday 06 November 2010 03:50:11 Boris Kochergin wrote:
The following reply was made to PR usb/130230; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Boris Kochergin sp...@acm.poly.edu
To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org
Cc:
Subject: Re: usb/130230: [quirk] [usb67] [usb] [cam] [umass] Samsung
Electronics
The following reply was made to PR usb/130230; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Hans Petter Selasky hsela...@c2i.net
To: freebsd-usb@freebsd.org,
Boris Kochergin sp...@acm.poly.edu,
freebsd-gnats-sub...@freebsd.org
Cc:
Subject: Re: usb/130230: [quirk] [usb67] [usb] [cam] [umass] Samsung
Hi,
Can you revert the last patch I sent an apply the attached one?
Then repeat the testing like last time.
--HPS
I captured several debug outputs here:
http://appliedtechnicalknowledge.com/freebsd/usb3-patch-214808/ . Maybe
something in these can help.
=== usb_hub.c
On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 1:37 AM, Hans Petter Selasky hsela...@c2i.net wrote:
On Friday 05 November 2010 20:06:12 John Baldwin wrote:
On Friday, November 05, 2010 3:00:37 pm Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On Friday 05 November 2010 19:48:05 Matthew Fleming wrote:
On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 11:45 AM,
Hi,
On Saturday 06 November 2010 14:57:50 Matthew Fleming wrote:
I think you're misunderstanding the existing taskqueue(9) implementation.
As long as TQ_LOCK is held, the state of ta-ta_pending cannot change,
nor can the set of running tasks. So the order of checks is
irrelevant.
I
On Saturday 06 November 2010 17:00:46 Michael Martin wrote:
On 11/06/2010 03:31, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
Hi,
Can you revert the last patch I sent an apply the attached one?
Then repeat the testing like last time.
--HPS
Here are the results:
On 11/06/2010 10:26, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
On Saturday 06 November 2010 17:00:46 Michael Martin wrote:
On 11/06/2010 03:31, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
Hi,
Can you revert the last patch I sent an apply the attached one?
Then repeat the testing like last time.
--HPS
Here are the
On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 7:22 AM, Hans Petter Selasky hsela...@c2i.net wrote:
Hi,
On Saturday 06 November 2010 14:57:50 Matthew Fleming wrote:
I think you're misunderstanding the existing taskqueue(9) implementation.
As long as TQ_LOCK is held, the state of ta-ta_pending cannot change,
nor
On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 07:30:38PM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
Hi,
In the patch attached to this e-mail I included Matthew Fleming's patch
aswell.
1) I renamed taskqueue_cancel() into taskqueue_stop(), hence that resembles
the words of the callout and USB API's terminology for
